Wednesday, January 11, 2006

What's up with Iran?

Have you noticed all the shit Iran is getting away with these days? Their President; Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has gone apparently nuts with his "come and get me" rhetoric.

A Sampling:


Today you will all have heard-and I hope that this is final-that the criminal of Sabra and Shatila has rejoined his ancestors. God willing, the others will join him soon


Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces and they insist on it to the extent that if anyone proves something contrary to that they condemn that person and throw them in jail.

Although we don't accept this claim, if we suppose it is true, our question for the Europeans is: is the killing of innocent Jewish people by Hitler the reason for their support to the occupiers of Jerusalem?

If the Europeans are honest they should give some of their provinces in Europe -- like in Germany, Austria or other countries -- to the Zionists and the Zionists can establish their state in Europe. You offer part of Europe and we will support it.


So, all that the European coalition to stop them has done so far is THREATEN (not impose) sanctions. Today Iran is removing UN seals from their enrichment plants. Our country, also has had little to say. In the past, Israel would've already sent their air force over to destroy the plants.

Why hasn't ANYONE done anything?

I'm no expert, but I think they already have a bomb. They're not hiding that they're pursuing one, but I suspect they are currently in possession, and everyone knows it (other than average Joe). They are a loose cannon, and while I don't think Iran will attack unprovoked, I DO think if we (or anyone else) ran in to shut them down they'd nuke Israel as retaliation, in which I'm sure Israel would reciprocate. That would be the start to a major world war, no doubt about it.

The press never reports how messed up these countries truly are. A little off the topic, but interesting tidbit: We were told that near Qatar they have a town that only the terrorists can visit, while our soldiers have a separate section they can visit. Here we have two enemies frequenting the same town, but they can't "cross the line". We KNOW the terrorists are there, but for whatever red-taped reason, we don't pursue them. Weird.

Anyway, we can blame the Clinton Administration for Iran's new bomb. Clinton's CIA had a Russian double-agent give "fake" trigger plans to Iran to track their progress. They were not flawed enough, and the Iranian scientists could work through the flaws. Now, what do you liberals have to say about that?

10 Comments:

  • At 10:08 AM, Blogger NAL said…

    I am not sure what you mean by Clinton messing this up. I'd have to look at the actual government white paper to confirm...I am also not a Clinton supporter as he is really a conservative. Really...his policies are truly Republican. So, perhaps that explains it.

    Using your logic, we could point to numerous failed, foibled issues around intelligence and mechanisms...Carter - Iranian Hostages; Reagan - Afghanistan, Granada; Clinton - Bosnia (and Iran); Bush - Afghanistan, Iraq, China, North Korea...

    Your final question really serves no point. It's not just about political party affiliation - it's about the complexities in dealing with foreign powers.

    So, I think there's enough blame (and praise) to go around for any administration in the last thirty years. I would also agree that I think Clinton's diplomacy was well done, but the covert operations were less than stellar. But, that's nothing new...

     
  • At 10:18 AM, Blogger Angry Republican Mom said…

    Its more fun to place blame, given the overall clientele to my website.

    I am just having my fun, since the press always talks about how the "Bush Administration" ignored terror memos, intelligence, etc..., and this is all his fault. Even though all the intelligence gathering occured before he took office.

    I can play the game.

     
  • At 2:36 PM, Blogger Difster said…

    Iran is seriously screwed up. I think they're worse than Iraq ever was.

    And Clinton certainly screwed up big time.

    I do think though that we had better use of our resources than to invade Iraq. Syria or North Korea would have been better choices.

     
  • At 3:51 PM, Blogger Meegan said…

    Sure, we can blame Clinton, fine with me. But we can also blame Bush. He included Iran in his "axis of evil," so why isn't he doing anything about it if he knows what's going on?

     
  • At 5:19 PM, Blogger NAL said…

    As you recall, Dear ARM, the myth of the liberal media is well documented as just that - myth.

    As a republic and as a democracy, government - during any administration - requires transparency. Clinton got what he had coming - and frankly - so did GW.

    It's called a vibrant democracy.

    Of course it's easier to revise history in the name of partisan politics, rather than focus on the importance of calling our government to task - terror memos, Iranian debaubhles and all.

    Your sarcasm has increased considerably as of late. What's wrong? Is the lack of ethics and morals in your party forcing you into a nasty demeanor? Don't let it - there's a bright side...somewhere.

    Peace out.

     
  • At 5:23 PM, Blogger NAL said…

    Oh yeah...a friend of mine thought you'd appreciate a link - you're famous:
    http://www.soapblox.net/chicago/showDiary.do;jsessionid=5C6EA3C3F0D5D5B7546F056975C0C5B8?diaryId=798

     
  • At 5:48 PM, Blogger Angry Republican Mom said…

    Doc:

    You are FAR behind the curve. Soapbox did article that a couple weeks or so ago. That, and Archpundit, Damn Liberals, and a half dozen or so other liberal sites. Then there's "Blood on my Teeth" and "Knitty Kitty", and even "Advice for Ladies", that have all at some time or another slammed me around.

    Then you have National Summary doing an interview about me, and a trove of other sites that love me.

    I forgot, is anyone saying anything about yours? Good or bad?

    Meegan:

    I think that question was answered: Iran most likely has a nuclear bomb. Our "war-mongering" President will probably LOVE to take them out, but not to the threat of the world.

     
  • At 5:21 AM, Blogger NAL said…

    As you recall, Dear ARM, the myth of the liberal media is well documented as just that - myth.

    As a republic and as a democracy, government - during any administration - requires transparency. Clinton got what he had coming - and frankly - so did GW.

    It's called a vibrant democracy.

    Of course it's easier to revise history in the name of partisan politics, rather than focus on the importance of calling our government to task - terror memos, Iranian debaubhles and all.

    Your sarcasm has increased considerably as of late. What's wrong? Is the lack of ethics and morals in your party forcing you into a nasty demeanor? Don't let it - there's a bright side...somewhere.

    Peace out.

     
  • At 5:21 AM, Blogger NAL said…

    I LOVE feeding the beast.

     
  • At 8:34 PM, Blogger Beth said…

    I've been concerned about the same things. We've seen this horse and pony show before. It sounds just like the lead up to the Battle of Iraq.

    Fortunately, we have a standing Army in the middle of the Middle East now. I thought that was a brilliant strategy on our President's part!

    I just wish it was a million man standing army. I also wish he'd quit cow-towing to the liberals and just unleash the dogs of war. Take care of business and not drag all this out.

    The Europeans will continue to threaten sanctions against Iran, the UN might actually try to impose sanctions, the UN will do nothing (when have they ever?) and and we'll have to deal with them.

    I hope we deal with them with bombs rather than using boots on the ground.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home